The Senate Republicans have made it clear since the beginning of 2009 they had no desire to reach bipartisan compromise with the Democrats. Instead they choose the surprisingly successful strategy pure obstructionism using a set of broken and arcane Senate rules. By effectively preventing the Democrats from governing (or preventing the Dems from governing effectively, take your pick), the Republicans have been able to tarnish their opponents in the eye’s of many voters, and therefore improve the GOP’s own election prospects.

Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell has pretty much publicly made it his goal to prevent President Obama from governing or fulfilling his many campaign promises. From the New York Times:

“I am amused with their comments about obstructionism,” Mr. McConnell said in an interview. “I wish we had been able to obstruct more. They were able to get the health care bill through. They were able to get the stimulus through. They were able to get the financial reform through. These were all major pieces of legislation, and if I would have had enough votes to stop them, I would have.”

The President acknowledges this is a problem and at least claims to be frustrated about it, and yet, so far, he has done nothing to solve the problem. From The Hill:

“Obstruct more? Is that even possible?” Obama asked supporters in reference to McConnell’s remarks at a fundraiser in Wisconsin, according to a pool report.

Unfortunately, the answer to Obama’s rhetorical question is a resounding “Yes.” As long as there is an artificial 60-vote hurdle in the Senate, not only is it possible for Republicans to obstruct more, but it is almost guaranteed to get dramatically worse, and soon. Democrats are in all likelihood going to lose at least a few Senate seat this November, and after that happens, it will become even easier for McConnell to get the 41 votes necessary to block legislation.

We are rapidly approaching the “fool me twice” moment for Obama, and, to a large extent, for the American people when it comes to Obama. Republicans could not be more clear about their intent to use the broken Senate rules to prevent Obama from fulfilling any of his big campaign promises. If Obama is serious about comprehensive immigration reform, climate change legislation, EFCA, and a host of other Democratic tent poles, he can only make it happen by pushing and pushing hard for Senate rules reform to eliminate the filibuster. If the Senate rules aren’t changed, there appears no path and no hope for passing important, promised legislation–for the rest of his presidency.

I remember Obama making a lot of promises during the campaign, but I never remember him promising to defend the destructive, anti-Constitutional Senate rules that make it impossible for our government to function effectively. (In fact, I remember him promising to change the way Washington does business.) Faced with a promise of pure obstructionism from Republicans, Obama must either push for Senate rules reform to enable him to deliver on his promises or admit to his supporters that those promises were hollow and his word is meaningless. On this, there can be no “splitting the difference.” Being a “fierce advocate” can’t mean just talking support while allowing Sen. McConnell and some silly Senate rules to get in the way—it means doing what it takes to make change happen.

Reading White Man’s Burden by William Easterly (should be Westerly, but there’s the rub). He bemoans all the senseless policies that have prevented the well-meaning West from saving the Rest. Here’s the email I sent him tonight.

Prof. Easterly:

I’m about 130 pages into the book, and it strikes me that your null hypothesis is absolutely backwards. The Washington Consensus, IMF, WB goal is to prevent development and entrench the PTBs. And on that front they have been much more successful than your null hypothesis which suggests that the West is there to help the Rest, meaning the poor in underdeveloped countries.

After all, there’s little argument that the U.S. foreign policy during the Dulles era was all about helping U.S. corps in banana republics, specifically to take advantage of the poor locals. Is there any reason, other than rhetoric to think that has changed? Policy outcomes, along with subsequent U.S. overthrows of foreign govts (all of which have made conditions worse for locals except for the local rich and U.S. corps doing biz in those countries), all support the opposite hypothesis than the one you advance.

I’ll finish reading your book and perhaps find a counter argument. But for the moment, reversing your null hypothesis makes more sense to me.

Why, the only vice I have left. (Not that I have even that anymore because in this job market, if you’re not prepared to pass a drug screen then you’re not prepared to land a job). Sux but one of these days…..

Oh, the thing about such emails is that I always get a response, and it is usually revealing. Often not for the reasons I sent it, but almost always advancing my knowledge of what the real agenda is.

I was at the NYU meeting when Easterly introduced this book, and asked him some pointed Q at the time. Was in about 2004 or 5, so I no longer remember what it was. But I do remember his head jerked up and he did a double take. Worth that reaction if no other.

Also, he admits in White Man’s Burden to being a shock doctrine aficionado who admits that model failed. So in the past 5 years, he might have had some interesting further thoughts. In any event, there’s no downside to my email.

A good friend of mine is on the Athletics Council, and he explained that it’s not Madam President’s fault. This money is part of the commitment NMSU made when we joined the WAC. She’s committed to weaning athletics off of instructional funding ASAP.

Yawn. I’ve heard that line before. I think I heard it the first time about 21 years ago, not long after I got here. I’m deathly tired of instructional funds going to subsidize farm teams for the NFL, NBA, MLS and MLB.

It’s been so cool, that the last several weeks I’ve been doing sweats and socks in the morning. But, today, it was back to normal summer. As few clothes as possible. Imagine the possibilities. But close your eyes.

BTW, the reason why I almost always get an A to my Qs to academics is because I’m always careful to include some academic jerk jargon. In this case, ‘null hypothesis’. Academics usually cannot resist such language provocation.

I also sometimes sign off with my Ivy Leaguish school & year (’66), indicating I’m a serious well educated old woman fart. Didn’t do that in this case ’cause I was wondering whether ‘null hypothesis’ language alone would draw him in.

Oh, we have a date certain. 2018 is the date. I’ve heard dates certain for this before, so I don’t expect it to happen then, either.

I asked Madam President about the proper role of intercollegiate athletics in today’s university during her open interview with the faculty. She supplied that standard non-responsive answer about how important athletics are to our external constituencies.

I was proud of myself. I managed not to do the projectile vomiting thing a la Linda Blair in The Exorcist.

Many, many years ago (prolly 25) I asked a prospective dinner guest whether he ate meat. Long before it became more commonplace to be a vegan. He replied by pointing to his teeth and saying: we don’t have canines for nothing.

If Democrats didn’t have Mitch McConnell to obstruct them, they would have had to invent him. Everything we see is kabuki, shadow boxing, it is only our agenda which is being obstructed. The corporate one has no such problem.

I don’t think it was just the Republicans standing in the way of legislation that was the issue.

I am tracking an EEOC administrative claim that was filed in New York. The subject matter involved discrimination by IBM Japan, where the subsidiary comes under the “Single Employer Doctrine”.

For most of the past two years, the equal employment commission operated without a full complement of members. Two of the five. This is because Republicans in the Senate obstructed the President’s nominees. Plus, the Chief Counsel position (also requiring a Senate confirmation) was vacant.

It’s not far fetched to conclude that not having all five members, plus the chief attorney, at the Commission slowed things down considerably.

I think in many areas of the Administration, decisions that needed to be made were delayed because there wasn’t a proper chain-of-command in place.

About 20 years ago, when I was still married to the Wicked Witch of the East, a friend of mine visited us. I knew he was a vegetarian, ovo-lacto type, so I planned the menu for the weekend around that.

For dinner one evening I made chiles rellenos. My ex- said she’d make the rice and slaw. The rice turned out so nice that Matthew asked for the recipe. She said, “Oh, it’s easy. Bring a cup of chicken stock to a boil…” She justified it by saying, “Well, it didn’t have any meat in it. You said he was a vegetarian and I didn’t use any meat.”

Stacking bodies with hacks or leaving them undermanned was a favorite tactic of the Bush years to weaken regulation. Obama has been slow to change this, but then I do not think “change” means what he thinks it means.

By effectively preventing the Democrats from governing (or preventing the Dems from governing effectively, take your pick), the Republicans have been able to tarnish their opponents in the eye’s of many voters, and therefore improve the GOP’s own election prospects.

I’ll take none of the above – the Democrats have tarnished themselves and they’ve tried to use the 60 vote excuse as a way of ducking blame. If the Democrats actually wanted the senate to operate Democratically, they’d invoke the nuclear option…but then that would remove one of their core excuses for why they pass such crappy corporatist legislation. When it only takes 51 votes, then the Democrats tie themselves up in knots trying to come up with excuses for why they are passing the crap that they are passing (see what happened with the PO with how Democrats initially had a more believable excuse at 60 votes, but then went all incoherent when the vote only required 51 votes). Blaming the GOP for the Democrats abuses and obfuscations only empowers the Democrats to engage in more corporatist abuses and obfuscations.

A prominent yoga guru was asked a question once about eating things that were considered either unholy or simply not healthy to eat…he answered with the story about being invited to a person’s house where he was offered a meal by the hosts who had labored for hours on a meal for the master. The meal contained a chicken dish that was prepared with wine and sugar. The yogi master sat and ate the entire meal as served. When his disciples queried him about his eating of the ‘forbidden foods’, he answered them:

My hosts prepared this meal for me and the quests as a labor of love…to refuse such an offering would have done more harm to me and my host; much more than any chicken and wine could have done! Always be grateful and accepting…that way you can transmute the food into goodness…

Highly informative and shocking to many of the masses, and a great recruiting tool as more people understand

If only the masses could get behind something highly informative and hopefully instructive, but I don’t see that bird flying none too soon, and that has always been rather shocking and disappointing! I hear ya man!

Thanks, edve. Made me think of this Marianne Williamson quote.
Our deepest fear is not that we are inadequate. Our deepest fear is that we are powerful beyond measure. It is our light, not our darkness that most frightens us.

eCAHN, I am not sure if it was deliberate or not. Because I have personal experience with this, I really just get the sense that that it was an unintended consequence of having no strategy to deal with the Republican Obstruction of 2009. I honestly feel that Obama thought he would get his appointments.

Stacking bodies with hacks or leaving them undermanned was a favorite tactic of the Bush years to weaken regulation. Obama has been slow to change this, but then I do not think “change” means what he thinks it means.

Hugh, I totally agree with this. Because the Republicans have been against the federal government since the South took the party over, they naturally underman it. That is, if they can’t outsource the work to their big money friends like Albert Lord of Sallie Mae. Or to Halliburton. Hardly anybody talks about this “hallowing out” as a particular aspect of contemporary Republicanism.

I think “Change you can believe in!” was a catchy slogan. But I’m in a minority here, believing that Obama means change. After all, if it were President McCain, I doubt the last nineteen months would have played out as they did. And it would be much worse, believe it or not.

And this admin has abdicated its ability and responsibility to us voters in DEALING with them vacancies.

Because them vacancies serve the Corporate Fascist Interest, that owns and operates our elected officials.

Your thought?

I don’t think it’s as extreme as you paint it. The inability to staff the administration goes directly to not seeing the Republican Obstruction for what it would become. The financial crisis was really underway at the end of the Bush Administration. (Lehman bankruptcy was September 15, 2008.) So my guess is that the Obama transition team was working on how to deal with the rapidly deteriorating economy of late 2008 and early 2009. They didn’t count on the fact that the Senate just wouldn’t approve their administrative appointments.

As to your comment about fascist-style political influence within the American corporate world, I do occasionally wonder that some “European models” of political analysis don’t in fact lend themselves rather nicely to some of the things you see coming out of modern corporate America. It’s not run by the Protestant Establishment anymore, to quote a term from Penn’s Digby Baltzell. So for some of the people who are running companies in America, it just might be that you could say what is the difference between them and a 20th century fascist.

It doesn’t take a Jedi Master to sense a disturbance in the force when you’ve got Caspar Milquetoast (Reid) beating up on Hopey Changey (Obama) – spineless as Reid is, Reid at least took an actual stand on the mosque issue instead of just voting “present” like Obama. When Reid is made to look decisive by the comparative patheticness of Obama, that only encourages those who have more of a spine than Caspar Milquetoast to be even more provocative.

I think it’s obvious by now that Obama would never fight for changing the rules to prevent obstructionism in Congress. He thinks people are so stupid that they will believe he’s ushered in a new era of bi-partisanship by passing any legislation at all. Plus the faux reform is just what the oligarchy ordered. That’s precisely how you get re-elected. Why fix something if it ain’t broke?

I think it’s clear by now that Obama never intended to honor his promises. More Republicans in the senate simply translates into a bigger bogeyman to blame for Democratic inaction on real progressive legislation. The status quo is working just fine for Obama and his pals. Unfortunately, I have little confidence that our increasingly ignorant electorate has the fortitude to pull away the curtain and expose “The Great OZ.”

You said it all – I keep getting calls from Dems asking for money to “help stop the obstructionists” in the senate. Seriously? Really? Last I noticed, the President has the bully pulpit but he does not choose to use it unless it is of personal interest to him – like getting his family into the White House. After that, he is all for conceding before there is even a discussion. You know, a good old talk up stage (remember the “Music Man” – that guy did it REAL good) – could get some action going. Instead, he grins, he makes cute remarks when safely out of the Beltway, and keeps his corporate buddies real close. If he is a one termer, please do not worry about his finances ….. they will be nicely taken care of by the Wall Street buddies he was loyal to during his one term. If he was a mumbler, I would “get” his fear of the lights. BUT – he has a great ability to speak for whatever belief he chooses to support on any particular day. And lately he pretty much chooses to leave the Big Boys alone. Where do I sign up for the Professional Left club?

I think we should just send the President a penny – tell him to keep the “change.” We want a real President. It was a valiant effort but we got more of the same – just talks better. Fool me once …… then get out of my face. And PLEASE stop calling and emailing me asking for money to support the “fight” against the Republican Obstructionists.

The 60 vote rule has always been there. In fact, it was 2/3ds of the Senate (up to 66) until 1975. And yet Democrats managed to pass the Civil Rights Act in ’64, and Medicare in ’65. Can you imagine this lot passing such landmark legislation?

What has changed is the unwillingness of Democrats to confront this problem. Currently, if cloture isn’t reached the legislation is tabled, allowing cheap & easy filibusters. The Senate Majority Leader however has the option of requiring Republicans to perform a traditional filibuster, which would require them to put effort into it and show themselves to be obstructionists. That Reid & Co. haven’t done this yet (and that Obama hasn’t pressed him to) just shows to me that Democrats really don’t have their hearts set on any sort of progressive legislation. Probably because they are competing with Republicans for funding from the same sources. And that, not the Senate rules, is the real issue.

As for the GOP, Obama doesn’t want to be label the “Black” President so people that truly believe they aren’t racist will still be comfortable with him. These are the same people like Dr Laura that think “Didn’t we do enough for you people?”. No you left the job unfinished because to have true equality you should have leveled the playing field socially (Health Care, Housing, Access to Education, Jobs).

Let’s face it a largely free upper education system like in much of Western Europe you might largely not need Affirmative Action if you take way the less obvious of racism which is apart of the Class Warfare.

Same with Health Care, if you take away the “fee for service” model, you open access to everybody no matter what their income level is.

That’s why Class Warfare is much a Race issue as just calling Black People the “N” word, which largely does nothing. What happens when you first put wake up in the morning is more important. If you have higher interest rates on your home loan, car loan, school loan, etc, etc. How is that fair? Rich people don’t need to borrow to go to school, get homes, buy cars.